Carl Paladino Says Homosexuality Not an 'Equally Valid and Successful Option'

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
Thank you very much. I think most would not have any problem with gays if the few that are rubbing everyones face in it ( Gay Pride Parades etc ) would stop. It is truly disgusting.
really, stop going to them.

it's not as if straight people aren't rubbing it in gays' faces every day, what with walking around with their kids and holding hands in public... just sick :rolleyes:

if you want to argue that they're not family friendly, fine... don't take your family to a pride parade.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
We're told that gays are just like everyone else, normal people.. Then you go and stereotype them. Right-wingers are the intolerant bigoted people?
Actually the definition of tolerence is to accept those who you find odd which I do.

Got any stereotypes of black people you'd like to share with us? :p
Yeah a lot of them can't swim very well. Probably has to do with them not being fortunate to have access to a swimming pool when they were growing up.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
You are the oddest troll I have ever seen... It seems you are the one that travels from thread to thread trolling, baiting and acting like an interweb tough guy. Didn't your mother hug you when you were small?

Yeah like you my mother loved me very much. The main difference is that she didn't dress me up in little girls clothes so I'm not burdened with the self loathing that you seem to have.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,620
4,675
136
really, stop going to them.

it's not as if straight people aren't rubbing it in gays' faces every day, what with walking around with their kids and holding hands in public... just sick :rolleyes:

if you want to argue that they're not family friendly, fine... don't take your family to a pride parade.

Really? You and I both know the crap they do in these parades doesn't belong in public. Get real.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,620
4,675
136
Yeah like you my mother loved me very much. The main difference is that she didn't dress me up in little girls clothes so I'm not burdened with the self loathing that you seem to have.

See, Thanks for proving my point tough guy.
:)
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
really, stop going to them.

it's not as if straight people aren't rubbing it in gays' faces every day, what with walking around with their kids and holding hands in public... just sick :rolleyes:

if you want to argue that they're not family friendly, fine... don't take your family to a pride parade.

Yeah he sure seems real familiar with them. Myself I've never been to one. I'd probably laugh which would be rude and lord knows I wouldn't want to offend anyone, especially some 6'8" ripped dude dressed in a Tutu that would kick the shit out of me.():)
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
Really? You and I both know the crap they do in these parades doesn't belong in public. Get real.
what crap are you talking about?

the "worst" thing I saw at the last pride parade I went to was a bunch of half-naked men dancing around... would I necessarily want my child exposed to that? not really. but it's not much worse than you'd see watching professional wrestling or any beer commercial.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,994
37,167
136
what crap are you talking about?

the "worst" thing I saw at the last pride parade I went to was a bunch of half-naked men dancing around... would I necessarily want my child exposed to that? not really. but it's not much worse than you'd see watching professional wrestling or any beer commercial.

That's as bad as it gets pretty much. Entire families come out to see the parade every year (route is half a block from where I live).

I see more scandalous behavior around Wrigley Field on game days then I have at any pride function.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,650
203
106
There is no requirement that you support homosexuality. There is however a requirement that you support other individuals' rights of self-determination and pursuit of happiness. If homosexuality is a sin, that's between them and G-d as long as they are not materially hurting anyone else.

It is important to support the individual, not the group as a whole, as it can begin to materially hurt other people. To allow general homosexuality to become a protected class, would be in direct conflict with their freedom of religion.

Lets assume that sexual preference becomes a protected minority group. For an otherwise qualified candidate applying for a paid church leadership position (aka pastor etc), the church could be forced into hiring a homosexual. This would be in direct violation of the principles of that church. Thus violating freedom of religion.

Yes! This situation has been happening in several churches for the last several recent years, and will continue.

So the church (and its members) has a vested interest in preventing the promotion of homosexual rights.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
Chirstians which support homosexuality ARE NOT christians.
The bible, which is the foundations of christianity, CLEARLY speaks against homosexuality.

It's in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, which is all that really applies to Christians, the only person who directly discussed homosexuality was Paul, and he was more or less against sex in all forms.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
It is important to support the individual, not the group as a whole, as it can begin to materially hurt other people. To allow general homosexuality to become a protected class, would be in direct conflict with their freedom of religion.

Lets assume that sexual preference becomes a protected minority group. For an otherwise qualified candidate applying for a paid church leadership position (aka pastor etc), the church could be forced into hiring a homosexual. This would be in direct violation of the principles of that church. Thus violating freedom of religion.

Yes! This situation has been happening in several churches for the last several recent years, and will continue.

So the church (and its members) has a vested interest in preventing the promotion of homosexual rights.

Oh? So by giving equal rights to homosexual individuals churches would be forced to hire homosexual priests?

Can you then explain to me why we have an abundance of female priests?

You can't? Aww, looks like your argument collapsed under the weight of it's own foolishness.

Freedom of religion means that the government cannot prevent you from practicing your religion, so long as you aren't harming anyone else. You do not get to use your religion to oppress the rights of others. Doing a Google search, I cannot find one instance of a church being forced to hire a gay priest.
 
Last edited:

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,650
203
106
It's in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, which is all that really applies to Christians, the only person who directly discussed homosexuality was Paul, and he was more or less against sex in all forms.

so then... I guess you dont know that the book of Acts, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation (Luke, Unknown, Jude, John) also make statements against homosexuality, and Paul wrote zero of those books...
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,673
28,825
136
Oh? So by giving equal rights to homosexual individuals churches would be forced to hire homosexual priests?

Can you then explain to me why we have an abundance of female priests?

You can't? Aww, looks like your argument collapsed under the weight of it's own foolishness.

Freedom of religion means that the government cannot prevent you from practicing your religion, so long as you aren't harming anyone else. You do not get to use your religion to oppress the rights of others. Doing a Google search, I cannot find one instance of a church being forced to hire a gay priest.

Based on their stance concerning homosexuality the line of gay people applying at the Catholic Church will be about as long as the line of blacks applying to work at Chinese restaurants. We seem to be able to deal with that dilemma.

To throw your own twisted logic on its head we should allow the military to fire highly qualified personal who are experts in Arabic culture something we really need because one of the Lieutenants wants to go down on her girlfriend. Smart!!
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
It is important to support the individual, not the group as a whole, as it can begin to materially hurt other people. To allow general homosexuality to become a protected class, would be in direct conflict with their freedom of religion.

Lets assume that sexual preference becomes a protected minority group. For an otherwise qualified candidate applying for a paid church leadership position (aka pastor etc), the church could be forced into hiring a homosexual. This would be in direct violation of the principles of that church. Thus violating freedom of religion.

Yes! This situation has been happening in several churches for the last several recent years, and will continue.

So the church (and its members) has a vested interest in preventing the promotion of homosexual rights.
I agree completely that homosexual orientation should not be a protected minority, I'm just saying that this is easier to accomplish if we treat homosexuals like everyone else.

It's in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, which is all that really applies to Christians, the only person who directly discussed homosexuality was Paul, and he was more or less against sex in all forms.
I'd never say that people should not follow some particular part of the Bible or tell anyone it's not the literal Word of G-d as dictated, but personally I've always had problems with Paul's dream visions of Jesus. It's just hard to imagine the Son of G-d calling up the dreams of someone he never met and saying "Sweet Me, I totally forgot to preach that whole 'Dad hates fags' thing and boy, is He pissed! So if you could be a lamb and whip out a bit on that, that'd be swell. Yeah, we're giving up the whole mixed garments thing and that business about fish without scales, but we're firm about the homos. Yeah, sorry, even the lesbians. I know, I know, but technically it's the same thing, not being fruitful and all, you understand. Yes, technically it's a mortal sin even if you just watch. Well, I suppose then it wouldn't be your fault, but if you're just pretending to be sleeping then G-d will know. You can? Swell! I'll tell everyone up here you're coming."

And yes, I know this is offensive and I don't endorse it for anyone else. And if I get to Judgment and I'm totally wrong - well, at least I dodged THAT bullet, and if insufficient hatred of homos is my biggest failing then it's even more screwed up there than here. Besides, Jesus was sent not just to redeem us, but to experience life as a mortal man; the first thirty years of his life were not about his preaching at all, but about us. Ergo, he loved him some hot Jewish lesbians.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
so then... I guess you dont know that the book of Acts, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation (Luke, Unknown, Jude, John) also make statements against homosexuality, and Paul wrote zero of those books...

Since I have little desire to read through all of those books again, would you mind providing sources?
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,650
203
106
Oh? So by giving equal rights to homosexual individuals churches would be forced to hire homosexual priests?

Can you then explain to me why we have an abundance of female priests?

You can't? Aww, looks like your argument collapsed under the weight of it's own foolishness.

Already happening...
http://atheism.about.com/b/2003/12/07/christian-university-sued-for-gay-discrimination.htm

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/01/2...ay-employment-rights-to-be-shown-in-churches/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ests-Britain-attack-Labours-equality-law.html

http://peasoup.typepad.com/peasoup/2010/02/religion-and-employment-discrimination.html
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
I think affectual orientation should be a protected class because we live in an imperfect world. I think that In an ideal world we wouldn't need any protected statuses because everyone would be treated equally. We do not live in that world, and thus, we have three basic choices (1) actively continue oppressing others, (2) stand by the sideline and do nothing, (3) fight like hell.

You don't like seeing a gay pride parade once a year? Try imaging what it is like to spend every single day of your life needing to hide a major part of who you are. No more using terms like "my wife" or "my girlfriend," no more walking down the street holding hands, no public displays of affection. No photos at work or in your wallet of your significant other. No talking about your relationship with ANYONE including those who are supposed to care about you the most. And no power to see your partner if a tragedy happens and they are hospitalized.

Then imagine trying to walk around each day and not bother anyone else, just lay low, and have some jackass hick running for one of the most powerful offices in your community demean you as being "less" than someone else.

That is just a slice of what it is like to be a homosexual person in our society.

Seeing a couple of men dance once a year?

Fuck...that ain't shit.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76

Not a single link of which addresses your point, which was a church being forced to hire a gay priest. In fact the law that people are getting all upset about specifically gives religious institutions permission to NOT hire homosexual individuals in positions where it would interfere with there teachings. Those who throw stones...
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I think affectual orientation should be a protected class because we live in an imperfect world. I think that In an ideal world we wouldn't need any protected statuses because everyone would be treated equally. We do not live in that world, and thus, we have three basic choices (1) actively continue oppressing others, (2) stand by the sideline and do nothing, (3) fight like hell.

You don't like seeing a gay pride parade once a year? Try imaging what it is like to spend every single day of your life needing to hide a major part of who you are. No more using terms like "my wife" or "my girlfriend," no more walking down the street holding hands, no public displays of affection. No photos at work or in your wallet of your significant other. No talking about your relationship with ANYONE including those who are supposed to care about you the most. And no power to see your partner if a tragedy happens and they are hospitalized.

Then imagine trying to walk around each day and not bother anyone else, just lay low, and have some jackass hick running for one of the most powerful offices in your community demean you as being "less" than someone else.

That is just a slice of what it is like to be a homosexual person in our society.

Seeing a couple of men dance once a year?

Fuck...that ain't shit.

Somehow I doubt those men dancing naked in gay pride parades are suffering any of those things. Personally I think there should be no protected classes; equality means equality, or it means nothing at all. With protected classes we're merely agreeing that government has the right to treat people differently and enshrining that some groups of people are not equal and never will be.

I agree with Walter Williams: If someone hit me in the head with a bat because I'm black, the important term in that sentence is "hit me in the head with a bat", not "because I'm black."
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,650
203
106
Since I have little desire to read through all of those books again, would you mind providing sources?

Indeed paul wrote this:
1 Corinthians 6

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 12"Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything. 13"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"—but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh."[b] 17But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.
18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.

but not this
Acts 15

5Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses."
6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
12The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13When they finished, James spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. 14Simon[a] has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16" 'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17that the remnant of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'[b]
18that have been known for ages.[c] 19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

nor this

Jude1
7In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
8In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings.

nor this

Hebrews 13
4Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
 

MJinZ

Diamond Member
Nov 4, 2009
8,192
0
0
Somehow I doubt those men dancing naked in gay pride parades are suffering any of those things. Personally I think there should be no protected classes; equality means equality, or it means nothing at all. With protected classes we're merely agreeing that government has the right to treat people differently and enshrining that some groups of people are not equal and never will be.

I agree with Walter Williams: If someone hit me in the head with a bat because I'm black, the important term in that sentence is "hit me in the head with a bat", not "because I'm black."

People don't realize that it's the most vocal and outspoken people that actually make a difference.

Imagine if MLK's "I had a Dream" was more like "I had a suppressed urge for desegregation". Nothing would have happened.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
Somehow I doubt those men dancing naked in gay pride parades are suffering any of those things. Personally I think there should be no protected classes; equality means equality, or it means nothing at all. With protected classes we're merely agreeing that government has the right to treat people differently and enshrining that some groups of people are not equal and never will be.

I agree with Walter Williams: If someone hit me in the head with a bat because I'm black, the important term in that sentence is "hit me in the head with a bat", not "because I'm black."

Ah, but this is speaking for a position of privilege. Neither you nor I can truly know what it's like to be discriminated against in this way. That makes it much easier to say things like "equality means equality" because we've never experienced what it's like when it doesn't.

Government programs are designed to equalize the playing field, not treat people differently. It's a backassward system I agree, but the alternative is (imo) much worse. It's nice to say "equality means equality" but the fact is that we both know it doesn't in the real world. Believe me when I say that I hope we will get to a point as a society where programs and laws about such things aren't necessary, but I'm not expecting it to happen during my lifetime.

Frankly there is little government can really do with regards to inequality. We can do our best to purge inequality from our laws, but that's about it. The rest requires tremendous societal change.

I'm happy for those who feel comfortable enough with their identity to participate in gay pride parades in this way. I believe they strongly face those situations in their daily lives, and this is their one chance a year to cut it all loose. More power to them.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
Sao123,
The problem with those passages is that they are incredibly vague. I imagine it's due to an issue with translation, but a broad phrase like "sexual immorality" could quite literally mean just about anything. Given the way that Paul wrote about sex, I doubt he considered anything sexually pleasurable moral.

That vague nature is also what allows other Christian sects to say that homosexuality is not immoral, and not conflict with the teachings of the Bible. Those books are not written by Jesus, but rather his followers, so it's entirely possible they didn't properly understand his teachings.

Do I necessarily believe this is the case? It's not really important. I simply point this out to you because using a broad statement that "Those people are not Christians" is a very powerful to make, and I remain unconvinced that you've provided sufficient evidence to back such a statement. Those people simply do not agree with your view of Christianity.
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
People don't realize that it's the most vocal and outspoken people that actually make a difference.

Imagine if MLK's "I had a Dream" was more like "I had a suppressed urge for desegregation". Nothing would have happened.
Perhaps. Jim Steinman said "Every hero was once, every villein was once, just a boy with a bad attitude", so you have a point. I myself would not have equated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with naked dancing men cavorting in a parade in front of children, but to each his own I suppose.

Ah, but this is speaking for a position of privilege. Neither you nor I can truly know what it's like to be discriminated against in this way. That makes it much easier to say things like "equality means equality" because we've never experienced what it's like when it doesn't.

Government programs are designed to equalize the playing field, not treat people differently. It's a backassward system I agree, but the alternative is (imo) much worse. It's nice to say "equality means equality" but the fact is that we both know it doesn't in the real world. Believe me when I say that I hope we will get to a point as a society where programs and laws about such things aren't necessary, but I'm not expecting it to happen during my lifetime.

Frankly there is little government can really do with regards to inequality. We can do our best to purge inequality from our laws, but that's about it. The rest requires tremendous societal change.

I'm happy for those who feel comfortable enough with their identity to participate in gay pride parades in this way. I believe they strongly face those situations in their daily lives, and this is their one chance a year to cut it all loose. More power to them.
I once applied for a TVA training program, or tried to. I was not allowed to take the test or even fill out an application because they were only taking minorities. (Technically they were only taking minorities and children of existing TVA government workers, but one can't say that to the non-elite.) Your interpretation is that it's perfectly okay to discriminate against me in order to discriminate for someone else because he has darker skin, and that will somehow make up for discrimination against some third person. In other words, we aren't real people, we're merely representatives of our respective racial groups, so it's okay to make me less equal if it will make their group more equal. I can't imagine how you possibly reconcile that with the concept of America, however imperfectly realized.

I do wish I had known earlier that I was in a position of privilege. When I was young and had to leave the house to use the bathroom, that might have helped. On those cold nights when the coal stove roasted you on one side and froze you on the other, when I'd wake to find ice crystals on the inside of our windows so that you couldn't see out, my position of privilege might have warmed the cockles of my heart. ;)
 
Last edited: